Opacity in Cross-Border Security Politics

I'll revise this to add some analysis and additional material tomorrow, but I think it's important to get the basic information posted now.

This article, from the CBC, discusses an extremely high-level, closed-door conference that took place in Banff earlier this month. The subject of the conference was national security - particularly as regards the integration of Canada and US interests (energy policy was also discussed). Public Safety Minister Day was on hand, and it is reported that US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld provided the keynote address. The media was not informed of the event.

Maude Barlow, writing for the Toronto Star, provides a good analysis of the event, its implications, and exactly what is at stake here.

The importance of this event, considered in relation to our current security context, must be recognized. With the O'Connor report fresh off the presses, and ongoing legal battles and heated debates around issues such as Guantanamo Bay, detainee rights (in both countries), rendition, and information sharing, the need to bring deliberations about national security into the public sphere has never been more apparent. Bearing this in mind, and noting the series of problems (atrocities, constitutional violations) that have emerged in relation to secretive anti-terror practices, the decision to exclude the media (and public) from such a high level policy conference speaks volumes about the menality of our governments.

When 'national security confidentiality' is invoked to restrict access to information in the context of hearings such as the Arar Commission of Inquiry or the Security Certificate cases, we should be concerned, and more than concerned, about the status of our democratic values; but when the entire process of shaping the future of our security policy appears to be an 'invitation only affair' (with both the public and the free press having been left off the guest list), alarm bells should be ringing.

Decisions made in the near future will shape the future of Canada-US relations, border governance, privacy, information sharing, civil liberties, intelligence-gathering, and the nature of 'national security accountability'. Clearly, there are many stakeholders in these debates, including the citizens of both Canada and the USA. If we, as democratic publics, want our national security policies (policy?) to reflect our interests, it is incumbent upon us to engage in a real, open, and inclusive dialogue about security - as citizens, and not as consumers or subjects.

More to follow. Comments welcome.